\nProfessor Valian might be familiar to some of you as the author, a few years back, of a shocker of a book entitled Why So Slow? The Advancement of Women<\/a>. Our host, Professor Uta Frith FRS, had invited her to present the highlights of her book as they pertained specifically to women in science, along with more recent results from the literature.<\/p>\n \nAfter our usual lunch in the Royal Society canteen, we all climbed the grand marble staircase to the Library (past the names of all the Presidents of the Royal Society since its inception \u2013 not a female among them) and \u2013 with a few self-conscious chuckles \u2013 pulled the masculine rows of chairs into a nurturing circle on the plush carpets. And then Valian gave us the lowdown.<\/p>\n \nNone of it came as a great surprise, but we felt a little stunned nonetheless. The general idea is that we all hold gender “schemas” (perceptions or stereotypes) that lead to subtle overvaluations of men and undervaluations of women \u2013 by both men and women, even those who want to be egalitarian and meritocratic. These small imbalances eventually accumulate until men tend to have the advantage. This isn’t just in science, but according to Valian, the scientific profession harbors an inbuilt exacerbation of this problem, as the schema for a scientist (“capable”, “independent”, “can-do”) overlaps much better with the schema we hold for men than for women (“communal”, “nurturing”).<\/p>\n \nI’ll give you some of Valian’s examples of how these schemas play out (see her book for the references). When lacking sufficient information about competence, say when viewing a fictional CV with a man’s or woman’s name on top, both men and women tend to rate the male as more competent. This tendency would obviously put women at a disadvantage during hiring and other competitive situations. <\/p>\n \nThe good news is that when given enough information that both are stellar, both men and women do believe that the pair are equally competent; the bad news is that in the absence of any information about their personalities, both genders rate the woman as “less likeable” \u2013 a penalty with proven concrete disadvantages when it comes to advancing in one’s career. So women have to overcome two hurdles if they want to succeed. Women with children have a third disadvantage, as studies show that this state definitely counts against you: interestingly, the more children you have, the higher the penalties. Valian presented a number of really fascinating studies \u2013 the one that made us laugh the most was the suggestion that women could offset their inherent “unlikeable” tag by conceding on small things, such as making the tea. (Valian, however, confessed that this was one indignity to which she herself could never submit.) There isn’t space here to do her metastudies justice, but if you live in or near London, I would highly recommend going to her upcoming talk<\/a> on 24 February at UCL’s Senate House<\/p>\n \nIt wasn’t all doom and gloom: Uta also presented us with complimentary copies of a wonderful booklet produced by the York University plant geneticist Ottoline Leyser with the support of a prestigious Rosalind Franklin Award from Royal Society: Mothers in Science: 64 Ways to Have It All<\/em> (cover pictured below). Within its pages are dozens of case stories about successful female scientists including a timeline of their scientific as well a familial successes. As I understand it, it’s not yet available for general release. But I suspect that in the face of the uphill battle that many women still face in the lab, it could be very inspiring. <\/p>\n \n We’re not actually paranoid: everyone really is out to get us. Last week at Science and Shopping, the UCL-based women in science networking group, we had a special guest presentation from Virginia Valian, Distinguished Professor of Psychology and Linguistics, Hunter … Continue reading ![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.lablit.com\/images\/HaveItAll.jpg\")
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"